Difference between revisions of "Debate:Was the media attention needed?"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
== It was needed to spread the word of an alternative to Wikipedia == | == It was needed to spread the word of an alternative to Wikipedia == | ||
I'm sorry... the what? [[User:Myk|Myk]] 23:26, 20 March 2007 (EDT) | I'm sorry... the what? [[User:Myk|Myk]] 23:26, 20 March 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | : I think it just made YEC viewpoints get mocked further. Look at the articles, who could blame them. --[[User:AmesG|AmesG]] 23:30, 20 March 2007 (EDT) | ||
== The attention was needed == | == The attention was needed == | ||
Revision as of 03:30, March 21, 2007
I discovered Conservapedia from the media but it has also seems to have attracted unwanted attention. Do you think we really needed all that coverage? --Eiyuu Kou 23:03, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
It was needed to spread the word of an alternative to Wikipedia
I'm sorry... the what? Myk 23:26, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
- I think it just made YEC viewpoints get mocked further. Look at the articles, who could blame them. --AmesG 23:30, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
The attention was needed
It should have only been mentioned, not covered
No, but if it was not for it, I would not be here
Sulgran 23:27, 20 March 2007 (EDT)